8 Replies Latest reply on Feb 2, 2011 3:18 PM by ECBowen

    iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM

    raviprakashz

      http://forums.adobe.com/thread/781961?tstart=0

       

      After reading the above thread, I still have few questions, whether to go for iMAC Pro or Intel Based Windows 7 64 bit with the above configuration.

      It was quite a long time some where around  2001 where I used to have 3 GB P4, with Pinnacle Pro one (Hardware + Adobe Premier 5.02), Windows XP Pro which I used for non-linear editing.

      In fact Technology as changed a lot and we have options now. I would like to know your thoughts on same... iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64 bit?

      My Purpose of Use:

      To edit my HD Video’s to blu – ray Discs. I am amateur in this and would like to go on learning more.

      Please suggest me on this…uploaded a excel sheet with the Hardware configuration which I am looking at.

        • 1. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
          Harm Millaard Level 7

          Just read a response to a similar question elsewhere.

           

          I'm a Mac user with several Macs including:

          • Mac Pro 8 core 16GB RAM
          • iMac 27" i7 Quad
          • iMac 21" Core 2 Duo

          I've also had PCs over the years running everything from Windows 3 up to Vista.    I hated Vista and downgraded everything back to XP Pro.    I have not installed Windows 7 because I don't have any PC hardware capable of running the 64 bit version.

          --- HOWEVER ---

          While the Mac is generally a very stable platform, so is Windows 7.   Much of the stability is going to be down to the hardware.  If you have a flakey component, like a flakey RAM chip you may not know it and could be blaming Windows and/or the software running on the bad hardware.  

          I think I have a suspect RAM chip in my Mac Pro and I can tell you that the CS5 apps keep crashing on me!   So, in this case, a Mac user could be jumping to Windows thinking Mac was unstable when in fact it's bad RAM.

          --- COST ---
          If you are concentrating on running the Adobe Apps then honestly, coming from a Mac user, the PC platform is just as good and will be cheaper to build (and keep upgrading) a solid workstation.  NVidia graphics cards are almost always cheaper on PCs and if you want to take advantage of the CUDA acceleration then you have a choice of Windows or a Mac Pro.  Forget the iMac, it's built in graphics cards are ATI. 

          A PC will give you many more options for other peripherals too. The iMac is what it is.  Buy it, use it, don't try to expand it with more than an external HDD (USB2 or Firewire) and an extra monitor.

          The Mac Pro can take expansion cards, but it's a LOT more expensive to buy.  A good CUDA graphics card it about $1500 !!

          A PC on the other hand can take USB3 cards, eSata cards, choice of lots of graphics cards etc etc.

          There ARE reasons to run the Mac OS on genuine Mac hardware, but running the Adobe Apps is not one of them   

          I'm currently looking at putting another editing station together and I can tell you that it would be a PC running Windows 7 simply because of the extra options for CPUs, RAM, Peripherals, Graphics cards, not to mention it would be cheaper too!

          Oh, and Steve Jobs hates Blu-ray, so you can't even play your Blu-ray discs on a Mac!   Arrgghh!           

           

          My feeling is that this a pretty accurate description, even though the lack of performance of MAC's were left out. MAC's are about 40% (or more) slower than similarly equipped PC's and cost about 50% more for the base system. Expansion as stated above is even more extravagantly priced.

          • 2. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
            Chuck A. McIntyre Level 3

            A friend of mine owns an art gallery and just bought one of those all-in-one iMacs.  It has a nice large clear monitor and a compact design she likes because it's easy to move around.

            When it comes to video editing I don't think anyone should ever consider the current lineup of Macs.  Eric with ADK did a price/performance comparison.  A low end AMD $2000 PC was nearly two times faster than a top of the line $8000 Mac Pro in common video editing tasks.

            1 person found this helpful
            • 3. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
              raviprakashz Level 1

              Harm, Thanks a lot for your Inputs and for the posted message.

              I will go for PC.

              • 4. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
                raviprakashz Level 1

                Chuck, thanks for your inputs on the same.

                • 5. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
                  Orytek Level 1

                  Chuck and Harm are making for a pretty good tag team to sway potential Mac users.

                  Mission accomplished. Too bad it's all BS as I explained in a different thread.

                  • 6. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
                    JaysonM-Y-ONw4w8

                    As a mac user myself the only thing that's keeping me from switching is the hope of the new Final Cut Studio and rumors of a new MacPro in late March-April.

                    • 7. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
                      Chuck A. McIntyre Level 3

                      The following are my opinions:

                      So far, I haven't seen a downside to building my own computers.  Learning PC hardware is just not that difficult and this strategy offers a MUCH better value.  One could pretty much duplicate a Mac because most of the parts are available to computer builders.   I don't know about the Mac case, which is a very nice design BTW.  Of course you can't put OS X on a self-built PC without some hacking and violating Apple copyrights.  I used to use a Mac and I think it was somewhere around 98' when the Apple CEO allowed Macs to be cloned.  They were still using the Motorola processor then and a company called Power Computing started building hardware that was faster and cheaper than Apple could build, so Apple put a stop to the cloning.

                       

                      When you look at the PPBM5 benchmarks, a dual Xeon system (comparable to the Mac Pro) just doesn't make sense from a price/performance standpoint for most video editing workflows.  The 980X is a much better choice.  The only real reason for sticking with a Mac in my opinion is a love of OS X.  I personally absolutely hate it, but others love it.  It was a better operating system than XP pro, but I think Windows 7 is superior to OS X.  I have tried Final Cut Pro and I hate that too.  It's only 32 bit and basically outdated software in my opinion.  The reality is, most Mac people are just not hardware saavy.

                      • 8. Re: iMAC Pro or Windows 7 64bit with GTX 470, i7 with 16 GB RAM
                        ECBowen Most Valuable Participant
                        function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

                        Orytek wrote:

                         

                        Chuck and Harm are making for a pretty good tag team to sway potential Mac users.

                        Mission accomplished. Too bad it's all BS as I explained in a different thread.


                        I am afraid not. I saw your posts in the other thread and nothing there proved anything. We have yet to see any results or testing for the Mac with the Quadro 4000 since they have not even been in stock yet in the channel yet that we have seen. I am still trying to find out how you have 1.

                         

                        Eric

                        ADK